manhattan. lucky for us, we have the perfect person to talk about it with. tonya perry has been serving as counsel to michael cohen during the trial. she has not given interview about his testimony before tonight. i will talk to her in just a moment. client, michael cohen is of course the star witness in the case, and he returned to the stand today for a third day of cross-examination. now, from the beginning, we have known that putting michael cohen on the witness stand was a high risk and high reward proposition for the prosecution. on one hand he is the central player. after all, he paid stormie daniels out of his own pocket. he said he did it at donald trump's direction and that donald trump was fully aware of the plan to cover it up because are key details. at the same time, cohen is a convicted felon who pleaded guilty to campaign-finance violations, lying to congress, and making false statements to a bank. not to mention, he spent over a

decade doing trumps dirty work. credibility issues are why the prosecution used the 20 witnesses who proceeded cohen to basically corroborate his story before they even put him on the stand. it is also why trump's defense team has single-mindedly sought to state their case on discrediting him. even in cases that might not be read crucial to rebutting the prosecution. for that reason the defense may think they racked up a victory for themselves today because during the cross-examination this morning, cohen admitted that he stole from the trump organization. in addition to the reimbursement for the hush money for stormie daniels, cohen was also given $50,000. that money was supposed to be a repayment for what cohen spent to hire a tech from to rig an online poll on trump's behalf. we don't have time to get into that detail. but as cohen said on the stand, he only paid trump $20,000 and kept the rest for himself. asked point blank today whether he stole from the trump organization, cohen said, yes, sir.

pocketing 30 grand might be shady, but it doesn't change the facts of the case, and cohen is not the defendant here. that is a point that executor susan has injured made crystal clear during her redirect but she asked cohen, are you actually on trial here in this case? cohen of course said, no, he is not. it may sound obvious, but it was a necessary reminder. after cohen left the stand, the prosecution lifted its case and the prosecution started calling witnesses of their own. one of them was robert costello, a friend of rudy giuliani, and a former legal adviser to cohen. costello testified previously before the grand jury that cohen told him trump didn't know anything about the payment to stormie daniels. he repeated that, today, in court. and that is when things went off the rails. as the judge sustained objections from the prosecution, castillo started audibly and visibly reacting. at one point he said out loud, geez. after that, judge mershon cleared the courtroom and

admonished him what the parent would third-grader. saying, quote, when there is a witness on the stand, if you don't like my ruling, you don't say geez. okay? and then, you don't see, strike it, because i am the only one that can testimony in the courtroom and if you don't like my ruling you don't give me side i, and you don't roll your eyes. once clear, judge mershon went on, saying, i am putting on time on notice that your conduct is contemptuous. if you try to stemi down one more time i will remove you from the stand. all in all, but a great look for one of the only witnesses the defense is going to call. we can see what is happening here. the defense is calling cohen a liar, the witnesses calling cohen a liar, there is lots of noise and banging on the table. just member, this is not michael cohen's word against theirs, this is michael cohen's word, plus the word of so many corroborating witnesses, plus documentation that lays out the entire crime in black and white. the defense wants it to seem

like michael cohen is on trial, but he is not. donald trump is. that is important to remember. joining us now is donna perry, she is counsel for michael cohen and this is her first interview following cohen's testimony. thank you so much for taking the time. i know that you spent the whole day in court, so i appreciate it. i want to start by asking you, how is michael cohen feeling about his testimony, now that his portion is done. >> would you believe i haven't spoken with him since we walked out of that courtroom? and i'm going to try not to and i'm certainly advising him to stay off of social media. i can tell you how i feel, which is not just relieved and exhausted, i think it was a great day for the prosecution, and i think the sum total of testimony, over 25 hours, i think, i think it all went well. as you point out, it is just of a kind, of a piece, with the

rest of the testimony in this case. so, to take your language, if the facts are not buying your side, pound the law, if the law is not on your side, pound the facts. that is what i think we have seen for the past reagan and change. >> a lot of table pounding including this exchange between robert costello and judge mershon. what you make of that? we know what the objective was, but what did you make of the impact on the case? >> we had hightailed out of the courthouse by them but from all accounts, this is also very much in line with what michael has testified to, and the reason why he did not trust bob costello. and so, as judge mershon apparently set in sidebar, the behavior bordered on contemptuous, illegal term, and i think not surprising given

what we have heard from the witness stand. >> is objective, of course, was to add to the effort to discredit your client, michael cohen, years ago, he waived his attorney client privilege when it comes to robert costello. do you regret that? should he regret that? >> i don't think there were any blows that landed. michael testified exactly what that relationship was, and why he stayed at arms length from bob costello. i think the jury saw that on full display, today. i think michael has been nothing but forthright with this prosecution team. some of the so-called gotcha moments were given to the defense, care of michael cohen. he is the one who first disclosed this red finch payment that you reference. he disclosed that four years ago in his book. there was no gotcha moment. he is the one who turned over

his phone, voluntarily, to the das office, and that is where the defense got those so-called , in a, clarence darrow moment text messages, between michael cohen. all of this has been, again, part and parcel, of michael cohen providing information, trying to be cooperative, meeting with the das office, dozens of times that he testified to, so, i think all of this is very much in keeping with, you know, the top line and the take away here is that he has made his peace with his admittedly checkered past, and has decided to turn his loyalties away from mr. trump, and toward his family, his country, and to be cooperative and truthful, as of the time he made that decision, and he was also truthful about the many lies that he's made along the way. >> to your point, he kind of

volunteer during testament, he was not pushed very hard, including the $30,000, you are a criminal defense lawyer, i will ask you about some of their strategies here, because i never cross-examined cohen about a lot of parts of this earlier testimony, including the crucial trump tower meeting including his visit to the white house. why do you think they skipped over all those topics? >> i want to first say, hats off to the prosecution, i think they did a masterful job, doing what we call drawing the sting and frontloading a letter that damaging information. and so, i think there were moments where coblentz, a very old friend of mine, samake say much, other than he probably felt there was only damage that he could do, by going back to it and revisiting it. and so, i think there was that, and i think that, they really didn't want to touch a lot of the substance but a lot of the

press again examination the way you do collateral, that would have nothing to do with the core facts of this case and the testimony from mr. cohen. and so, it can be described as destruction, noise, you know, it's a sideshow, it's smoke and mirrors, it's what defense lawyers sometimes do and i don't fault them for doing it with a really didn't want to go to close, to the actual facts and the testimony here. as you pointed out, i don't know if it is 20 witnesses or how many witnesses cooperate, but any which way, by documentary and testimonial evidence, i think it is a smart move to stay away from a lot of that. >> one of the things they focused a great deal of time on was a single phone call from october 4th, 2016, when they claim your client misremembered and michael cohen testified that he spoke about daniels, but the defense says that is a lie. it feels to me like a small detail in a much larger fact

pattern, here. do you think it was a strategic decision by the defense to make it into something bigger than it really is? why so much focus there? >> again, i don't fault them for that. it seemed like something that -- where they could elicit, you know, some inconsistencies or draw that out. and in fact, again, not a perry mason moment, this was a one minute and 36 second conversation. the jury heard the recorded conversation with karen mcdougal, where the substantive portion was a minute. so several topics of conversation were discussed and that one, of course a jury is going to be able to look at that, and say, you know, a lot can happen in 96 seconds but the prosecution -- is kind of

an old trick they can just make the jury sit there silent for 96 seconds and they will see just how long that is. so, i think that was a great moment in a substantive way, but it certainly, you know, there is something to be said for courtroom theatrics, and acting like you scored some big points and the way some of the press reacted, people thought so, just because there was that kind of performative energy. so again, i thought todd blanche did the best job that he could with what he had, and look, there is some baggage. no question. whenever you have someone pleading guilty as many times as he has, he has admitted it as many times as he has, you are going to have some moments. all in all, i did think that october 24th call, was not anything other than noise and sideshow. >> you kind of alluded to this, and cohen has voluntarily put some things forward, something she has been pushed on. is the big question here is,

should the outcome of this case rest on michael cohen's credibility? >> that is not for me to say, of course, certainly not during the trial. there is a very intense and a very smart jury. i have watched them, keenly, they are paying very close attention, and they are not missing a beat, here. ultimately of course, this will be in their hands, as soon as next week and they will decide. >> and that you have had a long day, thank you so much for joining me this evening, i really appreciate it. >> christie greenberg are standing by, we'll talk more about michael test money in the wild moment between the judge and defense witness that we are back in 60 seconds. seconds.

here to break it all down is

prosecutor glenn kershner and kristi greenberg, the former deputy chief of the criminal division of the southern district of new york. she was at the courthouse, today. let me start with you, we just heard donna perry's take on her clients testimony, over the last few days. what did you think? anything that she missed there in terms of good or bad moments? >> as donna said, her client has baggage. enough baggage to fill jfk airport but that said, i thought that he did remarkably well. i think people are really concerned about his demeanor, and how he would conduct himself on the stand, he was composed, he was composed at all times, he was respectful, he never got rattled, and he was generally consistent, whether he was answering questions on direct or answering them on cross. i felt like he really owned the moments that he needed to own about prior please and prior conduct. and look to my thought on the whole he was a real juxtaposition, as you mentioned, briefly, to what we saw later today which was

robert costello on the stand and really have a ton of antics. so, that's made cohen seem all the more steady, i think, in the eyes of this jury. he provided important testimony, he was corroborated in many respects, and his story generally makes sense. it really fits with what other witnesses have said and what the documents show. i think that overall it was a great job by the prosecutors. >> we will come back to that moment. i know you were in the courtroom for it. how to ask you the question i asked donya, which is, if you are in this courtroom, and you are the jury, how much of this is about cohen's credibility. that seems to be a core part of the defense strategy is pulling that apart, which we all anticipated in advance of the trial. >> michael cohen is an essential witness but there is no two ways about it and by all accounts, he withstood something like 25 hours of cross examination, and the reporting is that he never lost

his cool. i know you're going to talk about bob costello in a minute, but who would have thought another lawyer witness would all of a sudden make michael cohen look like the model of thoughtfulness and circumspection and decorum. now the story has become, bob costello, who, let's face it is aligned with trump and to the jurors will associate with donald trump, he played the fool in a way i have never seen a player lawyer play. hissing defendants do that understand that i've ever seen a lawyer behave that way. >> this is an important point. michael cohen is not a wallflower. we have all met him and spent time. sacristy, you are in the ring for the exchange, i believe, between judge mershon and robert costello at the end of the day. it was dramatic to read, he cleared the courtroom, a lot of language that i use with my children, is this really worth it for the defense? they were trying to get him to discredit cohen. at the end of the day, was it

worth it, in your view? >> no. it was incredibly stupid, because any concerns that these jurors may have had about michael cohen's credibility i think got lost, got overshadowed by just how unprofessional and uncivil bob costello is to the judge. juries tend to like the judge in this case and judge mershon is again, very civil and respectful of their time. he has a very gentle way of speaking with the jury, i would expect that they like him quite a bit, and not only for a lawyer, as glenn said, i agree, i have not seen a lawyer behave like this on the stand, but a finer point on it, this is not just any lawyer, he was also the former deputy chief of the criminal division of the southern district of new york. that was my old job job and donya's old job. this is someone who really should know better. to see him act with such

disrespect to the judge, you know, rolling his eyes, saying ridiculous absurd -- at one point he was trying to strike his own questions, talking over the judge, it was a lot and i'm sure the jury picked up on it and really didn't like it. now, this is what they are thinking about. they are not thinking about michael cohen anymore, they are thinking about this guy, as glenn said, they will associate him with the defense. the defense chose to call him and now he is there witness and they have to deal with the consequences of that. >> there is a certain irony that he discredited himself in his effort to discredit michael cohen. there is a lot packed in their. let me ask you, according to people in the room, todd blanche was a little meandering, he was a bit all over the place. the way that our colleague, rachel maddow described it, was the great british bake-off, meaning he needs to get these things on the record. explain some of the strategy about being a bit all over the

place. >> yeah. when i read the accounts of the cross-examination, what came to mind for me, prosecutors typically make particularly good criminal defense attorneys. prosecutors deal in what is and what was. criminal defense attorneys deal in what could've been. what might've been. what should have been. let's engage in some misdirection. he came across as a frustrated prosecutor. he didn't have a feel for cross-examination. cross-examination is generally about, get in, make your three best points and get out. when you go on cross examination -- probably lost, particularly if the witness is performing well and the jury senses the frustration of the defense attorney, they will start siding with the witness. so, i don't think he performed particularly well, and i think that is because he doesn't have a lot of experience as a criminal defense attorney. >> i could talk to you guys for

a lot longer, but we have to go to a break. sacristy greenberg and glenn kirchner, thank you both so much for joining me this evening i appreciate it. coming up next, donald trump has lots of surrogates, normal for any campaign. what is not normal is that they are joining him at his own criminal trial. that is happening. democratic strategist james carville is standing by, he is coming up next. stay with us. ith us. with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicine directly at the source. voltaren, the joy of movement.

hi, i'm chris and i lost 57 pounds on golo. golo isn't complicated. i don't have to follow a restrictive diet, and i don't have to spend a lot of time making meals. using golo was truly transformative. it was easy, and inexpensive.

(♪♪) (♪♪) bounce back fast from heartburn with new tums gummy bites, and love food back. (♪♪)

and they're all coming? those who are still with us, yes. grandpa! what's this? your wings. light 'em up! gentlemen, it's a beautiful... ...day to fly.

when donald trump spoke to reporters inside the courthouse today, he said a lot that wasn't true, what is new. there was one comment that might have taken the cake. >> i was supposed to be making a speech for political purposes, i am allowed to have anything to do with it, optics, because i'm sitting in the freezing cold courtroom for the last four weeks. >> he seems very focused, consistently, the temperature in the courtroom. more importantly, he said, i am not allowed to have anything to do with politics. really? because his senior adviser, jason miller seems to disagree. miller just told new york magazine he is full-time in the courtroom, and full-time on the campaign trail, maximizing every single minute the president has. if we can't be on the campaign trail, we will bring the campaign trail the president trump. and what he means by that, as we can see for ourselves, of course, is basically bringing a parade of trump fan boys and

fan girls -- out to the court every day. joining me now is longtime democratic strategist james carville. it's good to see you. i wanted to start -- we have talked about this before. you have said consistency that biden shouldn't focus on this. this campaign shouldn't focus on the trials, became pen strategist agree with you i think except for some fun they have on social media. given what the polls say do you think any of the changes in your view of trump is convicted? we don't know what will happen, but if he is convicted? >> probably. i think this is a conscientious jury. i think we will speculate in another 10 days and will have the answer. you know, assuming they have a conviction, they will talk about it, they're going to talk

about the evidence, paying attention to all the surrounding noise, according to a report i just listen to on your show that said there engaged jurors, they are paying close attention, and i have always been a big believer in our jury system. whatever verdict they come up with is the verdict i will believe. right now there is nothing to do about it. >> and we don't know how they will decide, that is how it works. but if they decide his conviction -- we don't know if they will, should the biden team change the strategy? or do you think they should stay focused on the trials? >> one thing to remember, when you are convicted of a felony, your whole life changes. they might take his passport away from him, the government's travel. his life is going to change, and i don't know how you can

put another log on this fire. i don't know how much people care about it, but i can truly agree with the white house strategist. stay out of it. there is nothing to be gained here. talk about reproductive rights, talk about expanding healthcare, talk about prescription drug price capping, talk about the minimum wage. talk about raising taxes or incomes for 400,000 people. these are all inherent popular positions that the president takes. why talk about this guy lying. every day he lies. i am 100% behind the strategy. no kerosene and no logs on this fire. it is out of control and if he is convicted, you are going to have all kinds of things that will keep the story alive. >> no kerosene needed, to your point. the kerosene is happening.

let me ask you a question for have been on a book tour and talked with a lot of people out there and this is the question people's always ask me, about -- democrats and independents, but how on earth is it possible that joe biden and donald trump are tied in the polls, given everything. what do you say to people who ask you that question? >> i am trying to affect the outcome of the election. i can't rationalize things. i know this. if the president talks about the supreme court, talk about capping the price of prescription drugs, talks about the minimum wage, talks about taxes he will do better. but i cannot explain 42% of the american people think january 6th was a tourist visit. it's frustrating, but i can't

change that. you got to stay focused on reinforcing your support with your own voters and expanding that into other people, and by the way, in trump, 42% were voting for nikki haley in enclosed aerobic and primaries in nebraska. this could be a time for the white house, always focused on dems in disarray. it's not like they are doing all that great. i have a crazy candidate all over the country. have you taken a look at the arizona republican party lately? so yes, i do think the president has to deal with -- the age issue is suffocating him , and he needs to bring up that he is only four years older than trump, i have released all

my medical records, wanted to release the records he chose to steal from the interns? is got to turn that around and quit complaining about the times covering his age, that's a waste of time. don't do that. talk about how you are going to change people's lives and make it better and how you are building a record. you understand the cost of living and you understand families are going through high insurance rates. it is pedestrian, but it is the stuff that wins elections. >> you said this before, it really struck me. there are so many negatives about trump, it is hard to figure out for some people out there, who want biden to win or don't want trump to win, what the best negative is. biden did a good event in wisconsin where he went to fox caen, where trump had promised jobs and not deliver on the jobs. what do you think the best negative is? what is your gut on that?

>> what i would like from the white house is some guidance, they are pulling twice a week, and you know, i have said, attacking trump is like a mosquito at a nudist colony. is too much to land on. but you have to pick one. i am not getting any guidance on what is the thing about trump . is it the mismanagement of the pandemic? the criminality on january 6th? the ongoing criminality? the fact that he is pulling for russia? is it the fact that he wanted to destroy nato? i don't know. when there are so many, we do need some real focus on, hey, guys, these are the two or three things that matter the most to people. i suspect that cutting taxes for people over $4000 is a good

one. cutting social security and medicare, is golden. we just need to block and tackle with any to rentable reverses here. >> i'm sure you'll get a call from the white house after you get off this show. i don't know how we will be mosquito in a nudist colony but we will come back and talk about strategy, we are just taking a quick break. ck break. why choose a sleep number smart bed? can i make my side softer? i like my side firmer. sleep number does that. now, save 50% on the sleep number limited edition smart bed.

plus, free home delivery when you add any base. shop now at sleepnumber.com

i still love to surf, snowboard, and, of course, skate. so, i take qunol magnesium to support my muscle and bone health. qunol's extra strength, high absorption magnesium helps me get the full benefits of magnesium. qunol, the brand i trust.

back with longtime democratic strategist james carville. i've been wanting to ask you about the debates. over the last few days we have learned that the president and former president trump agreed, there is only a month away before the first one. the biden team has been more -- the put trump on more edge, they have gotten under his skin a bit i assume they will do that in the debate but they also have to present, to the public, why he is a better choice and not turn them off from that what do you think biden needs to do in this debate? >> he needs to have the abortion issue home but that is the first thing he should do. say i'm not going to put anyone of the supreme court does not back the right to privacy from the contribution and does not believe that the supreme court ought to operate on the same ethics rules as state courts.

billion-dollar -- in the united states, he is out sourced this issue. i couldn't think of to better issues. i would go after him on those two things, really, really hard, abortion is a right taken away the people are mad about, the other is is the ultimate corporate shilling, letting people do whatever they want. that story was a great story, and i am very distraught of the failure of the democrats to pick on this story and ran it home. he could do a lot better job of covering the story. >> here you are. we have just talked about it. i have talked about this, too. i think this is a good type of event like the one that he did in wisconsin, more people should be talking about. the interesting thing about the recent "new york times" poll, 20% of respondents said that they think biden is to blame

for the job decision which is crazy. crazy. --.decision. little skeptical it could happen because trump is a liar. do you think biden should agree to more debates? is two plenty for the season? >> that's right. we've had a debate over debates. i am with you. i don't think he is much better than 50/50 that he shows up on the 27th. it was a good talking point and the way that trumps mindworks is all i have to do is tell people. why risk it? but i don't know, you prepare like you will have it, share your skepticism, but you got to build a narrative and history going into the debate, you are forcing discussion and questions on something, that is really important, here, and it's really important to talk about outsourcing the judiciary and energy policy, and russia is controlling our foreign policy is that what we really want? because that is what he is really promising to do.

i think he is picking up inherently on the popular positions and that's a great opportunity for democrats. spent lots of people agree. let me ask you about rfk jr. this is like another question that comes up a lot as you are talking to people, he's not going to be on the first debate stage, he might hurt trump more than he hurts biden, for people who are anxious out there, given how much he is getting in the polls, should biden supporters be anxious? or do you feel less anxious about it, now? >> i will put this in the river parish vernacular. he is definitely, i think, is almost sure to hurt trump more than he is going to hurt president biden, and we shouldn't be worried about him, because there are some voters that are just turned off it or not going to vote for president biden, but, the president of

the people around him, you got to focus on the abortion issue, that focus on his billion- dollar promise for the donation for social security and medicare, they have golden opportunities, don't worry about rfk jr., >> you mentioned nikki haley voters earlier, i think a lot of people trying to figure out what to make of her percentage of votes that she has gotten even after dropping out. there's a lot of outreach going on behind the scenes. if there is something publicly that would be appealing, that the biden campaign should be doing to appeal to these voters, or primarily handle behind the scenes? what is the best way to do it? >> i think, retired national security people, retired u.s. attorneys, justice department people with republican backgrounds, i think that you need them to come out,

president biden should be on a phone encouraging liz cheney and chris cristi, and people like that to say, the stakes are too big it is too dangerous to go back to trump, and, i do think we have an opportunity, with conservatives sensible republicans who cannot take this. but it's going to take some bring along, it will take some leadership, but i think he might do pretty good in terms of getting some unusual endorsements for connecticut important. >> i think so too, james carville, i love talking politics with you, thank you for joining me this evening, as always. >> i always love the company, thank you so much. >> great talking to you. coming up, i will ask lynn how trumps 2024 hesitant briefcases turned into something concerning. marco rubio is the latest example, something should be

getting a lot more attention, that is coming up, next. next.

okay, some republicans, specifically republicans who hope to be donald trump's running mate seem to have trouble answering a very straightforward yes or no question. will you accept the results of the 2024 election. >> senator, will you commit to accepting election results in 2024? >> at the end of the day, the 47th president of united states will be president donald trump at >> yes or no, will you accept their election results of 2024, no matter who wins? >> that is my statement. >> will you vote to certify the results of the 2024 election, no matter what they show? >> we will see if this is a legal and valid election. >> will you commit to accepting the results of this year's election? >> if it is a free and fair election, dana. i think every republican will it is yes to clicks of the

results. >> okay. a couple of different avoidant strategies going on there. so, i'm just ignoring the simple question completely insane trump will win, some putting their realties in there about their willingness to question the outcome. we will see if it is free and fair, who knows. listening to these answers, you would think that fraud has been rampant in recent elections, it has not. i will say it again. despite what trump and his allies repeatedly claim, there has been no evidence of widespread election fraud, but that does not matter too far too many members of the republic party led by a guy who just a few weeks ago said he would not feel good, he would not feel good about hiring anyone who admits that his opponent won the 2020 election, which by the way, his opponent, joe biden, did win. instead, doubting the election systems has become a litmus test for anyone who wants a place in trumps party, let alone the role of vice president, then they really have to work for it. as we saw yesterday, when florida senator and vp hopeful

became yet another republican hopeful to refuse to say if he would accept the 2024 election results. >> will you accept the election results of 2024, no matter what happens, senator? >> no matter what happens? no, it's an unfair election >> no matter who wins. >> i think you're asking the wrong person for the maquettes of the ones that have opposed every republican victory since 2000. every single one. >> no democrat has refused -- hillary clinton conceded. senator, >> hillary clinton said the election was stolen from her, and kamala harris agreed. >> senator, she conceded the election. >> she said -- she said that trump was illegitimate, she said that the election had been stolen, kamala harris agreed. by the way, there are democrats serving in congress today, who, in 2004, voted not to certify the ohio electors, because they said those machines were tampered with, and you have democrats now saying that they

will not certify 2024 because trump is an insurrectionist who is ineligible to hold office. you have to ask them. >> senator -- center -- >> you have never asked them about that question. >> senator rubio -- al gore oversaw the certification of his own election loss. john kerry never claimed millions of illegal let's go hillary clinton never claimed she won the states that she lost intersecting by a lot. all of those candidates conceded all of them. there is a reason, the head of this party has pushed lie after lie about election fraud, that's why. he is still pushing that undemocratic idea that somehow any possible victory by his opponent cannot be trusted or believed. the republicans below him, folks like marco rubio, and other trove of the vp hopefuls are all showing they are willing to enable the slide. that is pretty dangerous.

coming up, when it comes to ethical concerns around supreme court justices, samuel alito says hold my beer. we are back after a quick rake. only purple's gel flex grid passes the raw egg test. no other mattress cradles your body and simultaneously supports your spine. memory foam doesn't come close. get your best sleep guaranteed. save up to $800 during our memorial day sale. visit purple.com or a store near you

a slow network is no network for business. that's why more choose comcast business. and now we're introducing ultimate speed for business, our fastest plans yet. we're up to 12 times faster than verizon, at&t, and t-mobile. and existing customers could even get up to triple the speeds at no additional cost. from the company with 99.9% network reliability and advanced cyber security, it's ultimate speed for ultimate business. and it's all from comcast business.

you might recall that in april of last year, a trans social media influencer named dylan mulvaney posted the video on your screen right now. with some bud light plans she was canned she was sent as part of the march madness campaign. you might remember that video started a firestorm of hate from the right. even a boycott of the beer and the company that produces it. bud light sales plunged in the weeks following the video because of anti-trans outrage on the right. fast forward to april 13th of last year, four months after the original video was posted. that is when an anti-lgbtq influencer posted a, quote, pre- transition photograph of dylan mulvaney and disgustingly referred to her as a dude. the very next day, on april 14th, supreme court justice

samuel alito reportedly sold his shares of anheuser-busch. he also bought shares of the competitor, course. that is all according to financial disclosure filings reported by lower.com. anti-trans panic breaks out because of one post by one influencer and a supreme court judge sells shares of the company she was endorsing and buy shares of the competitors. just totally normal supreme court justice kind of stuff. if you watch the show yesterday you rethinking hey, didn't we just hear something super weird and concerning about justice alito? the answer is yes, you did. that is because the "new york times" just reported about an upside down flag hung outside his home following january 6th. at a time when the symbol was being used in support of donald trump and the big lie. now, he has blamed all of that on his wife, and if you'd she was having with the neighbors.

misses alito putting a symbol of insurrectionist up on their home that he must have literally walked by every single day. that is how he describes it. now, don't forget, justice alito also took a luxury fishing trip with a gop billionaire who had cases before the supreme court. his excuse for that one was that the seat on the private plane would otherwise have been vacant. of course, there is a lot of smoke surrounding this one justice in the midst of the avalanche of reporting about just how online and political and cozy with billionaires justice samuel alito is, i keep coming back to an interview he gave the wall street journal on 2022, where he said this. quote, everyone is free to express disagreement with our decisions and to criticize our reasoning. okay. but saying, or implying, that the court is becoming a legitimate institution, or questioning our integrity crosses an important line. crosses an important line for generally agree with the point. unfortunately, justice alito, when you cross the line, we

should expect from supreme court justices, you give us no choice in the matter. that does it for me tonight. jampacked rachel maddow show starts right now. hi, rachel.'s budget is one of those days where i feel like i have a 10 pound show in a five pound bag and everything is spilling out. >> get to your attention pound show. >> thank you very much but appreciate it. thanks.'s thanks to you for joining us this hour. you know how sometimes i start the show with something weird? and you don't know why i am bringing it up? like, maybe you trust me enough to stick with me through it? tonight is one of those nights. i fully concede, this will start off seeming very out of nowhere, but i swear, it is on the days news and if you bear with me for just a second i will make it make sense. okay? one of those nights, but here we go. ready? meet this guy.

the most highly paid agent in the united states in the lead up to world war ii. his job was to spread propaganda for the in the united states. this guy was charged and convicted of being a agent in the u.s. and he was a relatively well-known figure, so it was relatively big news when he was charged and convicted. front page of the "new york times", for example. the bigger scandal about him was that he got a bunch of neighbors of congress to participate in this propaganda thing. g. time. the same guy. and the first time it was for being a nazi agent. the second time, it was not just for him personally being a nazi agent, it was a much bigger indictment. for him being part of a large seditious conspiracy against the united states. and that is when members of